Health claims denial for alcohol intoxication: State laws and structural stigma

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundSome alcohol exclusion laws (AELs) allow health insurers to deny coverage to individuals injured due to being intoxicated. Evidence has shown that such AELs disincentivize health‐care providers to screen for alcohol while they deter treatment utilization by people with an alcohol use disorder (AUD). Certain states have changed AELs to enhance the health of people with an AUD, but these changes are not well documented in the extant literature. This study examined the current status and historical trends in AELs across US states.MethodsWe conducted a systematic legal analysis in 2023 to examine how state alcohol exclusion laws vary across the United States. These laws allow or prohibit insurers from denying coverage for injuries or deaths related to alcohol use. We classified the states into three categories: (1) States that explicitly permit alcohol exclusions, (2) States that explicitly ban alcohol exclusions, and (3) States that have no clear policy on alcohol exclusions.ResultsWe found that 18 states still have alcohol exclusion laws, down from 37 in 2004. Meanwhile, the number of states that have explicitly banned AELs and prohibited insurers from applying alcohol exclusions (AEs) to their policies has increased from 3 to 15 in the same period. The remaining 17 states have no clear laws on AEs. We also noted that five states that repealed their AELs did not adopt any specific prohibition on AEs, and four states limited their prohibition to policies that cover hospital, medical, or surgical expenses.ConclusionsOur systematic mapping reveals that some states have prohibited AELs in response to their detrimental effects. However, some states maintain these policies, and none has effectively outlawed AEs in the last 10 years, despite their possible role in reinforcing stigma.